| Re: Looking for IDL code documentation standards [message #44055 is a reply to message #44050] |
Mon, 16 May 2005 13:01   |
Michael Wallace
Messages: 409
Registered: December 2003
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> IDL coding style tends to be quite personal, even for RSI programmers.
> Take a quick perusal through !DIR/lib and notice that they can't even
> agree on whether to indent the body of routines!
Yeah, I've noticed that before. Lack of indentation drives me up the wall.
> I whipped up this example coding standard, trivially enforceable by
> IDLWAVE:
>
> http://idlwave.org/idlwave_template.pro.html
>
> Hope it is of some use.
Actually, except for the indentation rules, it is pretty close to the
rules I made up for myself.
Reserved Words - lowercase (e.g. begin, end, do, for, if, while)
Variables: lowercase, words separated by "_" (e.g. my_var)
Routines: lowercase, words separated by "_" (e.g. my_func)
Keywords: UPPERCASE, words separated by "_" (e.g. MY_KEYWORD)
Classes: MixedCase, no separation character (e.g. MyWonderfulClass)
Methods: MixedCase, no separation character (e.g. GetProperty)
Indentation: 4 spaces for each block
Long lines: 8 spaces or align to previous line (programmer's discretion)
If if...then...else is too long to fit on a single line, break into
begin...end blocks rather than use line continuation. Same rule for
while, for, etc. Simply put, use line continuation only when you have to.
Avoid multi-command lines (e.g. command1 & command2 & command3)
Use spaces around operators (e.g. var = foo + 2 ^ 32)
No spaces between function name and parenthesis (e.g. my_func(foo) )
I've got several more spacing rules, a couple commenting rules and file
naming conventions, but I don't want to spend the time writing them out.
And I'd probably wind up boring everyone to death. Either that or
they'd just stop reading and go on to a thread with more excitement. :-)
-Mike
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
